When rereading I am not a Story by Galen Strawson, there were a lot of thing I didn’t see the first time and a lot I could elaborate on because of the conversations we had in class. The first thing I notice was in his introduction when he stated the psychologist Jerome Bruner and how “we become autobiographical narratives by which we tell about are lives”, when I read the part in his essay I didn’t remember he said something about autobiographical narratives in his introduction until I read it again. Also in class when we talked about what his introduction does, the reader would never know that he disagrees with us narrative writing until the 3rd paragraph. I feel as though through reading it again he believes that you are either a narrative or non- narrative, I think you can be a non narrative but also a narrative when it’s your life story you are telling. I may have this all wrong that is just how I took it. One thing that I did not agree with or at least bothered me was when he states that he doesn’t “think an autobiographical narrative plays a significant role in how I experience the world” although right after that he gives great examples to how autobiographical narratives do play a role in how we see the world. This was one thing I read critically the second time I read it verse the first time I read it.
One word that help me clear the fog was grotesquely in the content to French philosopher Michel de Montaigne na dhow he was describing a memory.
Another word is hindrance in the content of poor memory and non narrative disposition
